Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper

On Friday 07 September 2007 21:57:35 Nick Piggin wrote:

> 
> > > Anyway, the lfence should be able to go away without so much trouble.
> >
> > You mean sfence? lfence in rmb is definitely needed.
> 
> I mean lfence in smp_rmb().

One point of rmb is to stop speculative loads and I don't think we 
can get that without lfence.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Intel Memory Ordering White Paper
    • From: Jesse Barnes <[email protected]>
  • Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.23-rc5] ata_piix: replace spaces with tabs
• Next by Date: Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper
• Previous by thread: Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper
• Next by thread: Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]